Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagadguru Ramanandacharya swami Ramnareshacharya ji maharaj


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. The notability discussion is inconclusive, but I'm deleting per WP:BLP, which requires that biographies of (presumably) living people cite reliable sources, and this article has none.  Sandstein  05:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Jagadguru Ramanandacharya swami Ramnareshacharya ji maharaj

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Not notable - fan site. Wikid as&#169; 00:10, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No notable references on Google India or online newspapers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceman7Spiff (talk • contribs) 00:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It is a bit difficult to keep up with the Swamijis, but a Google news search for "Ramalaya Trust" (mentioned in the article, as something this Swami founded) shows that it was founded by a totally different Swami - IExpress, so that claim of linking with the Prime Minister to prove notability doesn't appear to be right. The blog link looks appears to be self published.-SpacemanSpiff (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral Based on sources below from User:Fences and windows, I'm updating my vote. Most of the sources prove that the subject is the head of a sect/group, but I'm not sure if that is notable enough, but enough doubts in my mind to not vote. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 17:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment The article is in terrible shape, but the subject appears to be notable. He has been mentioned in two articles from seemingly-reliable sources (but only for quotes, not because of himself). Mm40 (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Trivial mentions don't make someone notable. Significant in-depth coverage in reliable sources is needed. Drawn Some (talk) 05:49, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —  Salih  ( talk ) 06:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  —  Salih  ( talk ) 06:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't read Hindi, but I can tell that the source for the article, http://www.ramanandacharya.blogspot.com/, is a blog. In the absence of a verifiable source, such as a book about notable persons within the Vaishnav tradition of Hinduism, there's no means of confirming whether an article about this individual is appropriate. Mandsford (talk) 14:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Appeal to South Asian editors. It would make it much easier for people to evaluate biographical articles if the titles could simply be the names that people were given at birth, rather than being surrounded by multiple honorifics as seems to be the case here, and with many other articles about South Asian people. We have articles called George Washington, not President General George Washington and Winston Churchill, not Prime Minister Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can), Nobel Prize laureate and honorary citizen of the United States. If this practice was followed it would be much easier for those of us unfamiliar with the article subjects to help with sourcing. I've tried a couple of searches to see if I can find anything for this article subject, but without knowing what is part of his name and what is a title I really can't get anywhere. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources found, neutral. Phil's right, but I'm pretty sure that Ramnareshacharya is his actual name. "Jagadguru Ramanandacharya" seems to be a post referring to a previous Swami, "swami" is a type of religious master, and "ji maharaj" seems like an honorific. He's mentioned in these Indian newspaper articles: Fences and windows (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources not providing sufficient notability. It appears that sources only mentions someone with a similar name in passing. Wikid as&#169; 22:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. just not notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Fences and windows (talk) 03:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.